Subject:
|
Re: LEGO trains...The Future of Model Railroading?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Wed, 24 Nov 1999 01:37:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1213 times
|
| |
|
|
Jim Rorstrom wrote in message ...
> In lugnet.trains, Frank Filz writes:
> >
> > Of course what we could run into is that the LEGO train hobby dies a
> > horrible death when TLC gets tired of letters from parents complaining
> > that their kid is no longer happy with the 4'x8' HO train layout which
> > was put together for under $1000 and now wants them to spend $10,000 or
> > more on LEGO sets after seeing one of our shows and buying a LEGO train
> > set.
>
>
> I bet it's closer to even money, if you compare to the good HO, not the • junk.
> Lego in never junk, even if we don't always like the design. I have spent • a
> few thousand on both N-scale and LEGO in the past 5 years and I feel I get • at
> least as much value with the LEGO. If the parents (above) have already
> invested hundreds or thousands in non-train LEGO kits for their kids than • the
> scales tip to LEGO.
Well, the cost depends very much on whether you require all the scenery to
be LEGO pure. The GMLTC layout would be far more expensive to create than a
similar quality HO or N gauge setup. You can't compare LEGO to Brass engines
and craftsman wood kits, you need to compare it to quality plastic kits. You
can get an HO train for the same or lower cost than the LEGO trains. The
structures will cost about the same, or very possibly less. The terrain and
foliage for a 4'x8' layout could be done for a couple hundred bucks, whereas
LEGO terrain would cost you at least a thousand dollars (one layer of 2x4
bricks on an approximately 4'x8' area takes 10,000 bricks, which is 100
dollars at 1 cent a brick, but of course if you want bricks in a specific
color, you either need to break down buckets/tubs and sell the bricks you
don't want, or pay 10 cents a brick or so, foliage is going to cost a lot
more).
Existing sets is not going to tip the balance much. Notice that no one other
than the GMLTC is doing modules the way they are, and the reason they are
able to do so is due to a once in a lifetime person who happens to have more
bricks than most people could even remotely conceive of.
Now if we change direction and allow non-LEGO terrain, what guideline do you
then use to determine if a layout is pure or not?
Part of what this whole debate boils down to is what each individual modeler
decides is right for them. LEGO trains also aren't the only theme which
brings this into question. People are doing L-Draw models using bricks in
colors TLC does not make available to us. People are photographing their
models in non-LEGO settings (and even TLC does this).
> All those sets suddenly have new possibilities. Try to
> do that with HO.
This to me is what makes LEGO trains an interesting and valid hobby. It also
does not the least bit require that the only supplier of the parts be TLC.
Frank
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LEGO trains...The Future of Model Railroading?
|
| (...) Sorry Frank Deeppockets Filz, (you always outbid me on eBay!) but there is at least one other who is making modules - me. I am trying to get people in California to have an LTC here, but have been too busy at work to really push it right now. (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LEGO trains...The Future of Model Railroading?
|
| (...) I bet it's closer to even money, if you compare to the good HO, not the junk. Lego in never junk, even if we don't always like the design. I have spent a few thousand on both N-scale and LEGO in the past 5 years and I feel I get at least as (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
44 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
